BOCC Deems Controversial Lena Road Property as "Surplus

BRADENTON – Heading into the 2020 election, several Manatee County Commission candidates now on the board railed against a county land acquisition that they claimed was not worth nearly what had been negotiated. At last Thursday's land use meeting, commissioners somewhat discreetly voted to follow County Administrator Scott Hopes' recommendation to deem the land "surplus," so that it might be sold off.

Item 19 on the agenda was added only the evening prior and was set to be a consent agenda item–meaning it would include no presentation or discussion and would be voted on only as part of a slate of items being approved en masse. Commissioner Carol Whitmore did ask that the item be pulled. Nevertheless, no substantial discussion took place before it was approved 7-0.

In October of 2020, the Manatee County Commission voted 5-2to spend $32.5 million acquiring 161 acres of a former dairy farm next to a county landfill off State Road 64 and Lena Road. The land was said to be the last parcel of that size in an area of the county that had been identified as one that would require substantial county infrastructure in the near future.

The plan was for the site to eventually house an operations center that would extend the life of the landfill, while also housing a facility for the public works department, utility field infrastructure, fleet support services, and a new east-county Manatee County Sheriff’s Department station.

When considering the cost of purchasing the required land piecemeal and at future prices (which skyrocketed in the year following the purchase), county staff advised commissioners that extending the life of the landfill while also securing parcels for the other needs made the property in question uniquely ideal. The process took place over several years and two county administrators, requiring multiple approvals from commissioners.

Local developers, however, were not happy with the purchase, and a developer-funded PAC used the issue to attack then-incumbent District 1 Republican Priscilla Trace, who would go on to lose her primary to current District 1 commissioner James Satcher. Commissioner George Kruse, who was facing former county administrator Ed Hunzeker, also made the purchase a major part of his platform, as Hunzeker had been the administrator who initially recommended the purchase.

So too did current chair, Kevin Van Ostenbridge, who would move to fire Hunzeker's successor, Cheri Coryea, almost immediately after being seated. Kruse declined to provide the fourth vote for firing Coryea at that time, though he flipped the split vote later, during a bizarre meeting in which Kruse (who is currently facing DUI charges) proclaimed from the dais that he had been having had an extramarital affair during his campaign.

While the issue seemed to die, aside from the occasional barb at previous administrations from those commissioners during meetings, it was added to Thursday's agenda at the last moment, without formal notice to commissioners, a curious detail given the scope of the action.

The east county population growth and land price inflation have both exceeded projections at the time the acquisition was initially conceived. Also noticeably absent was a conversation about how the county will now deal with the acceleration of future landfill requirements or the purchase of land for the other facilities, given both the difficulty in obtaining suitable landfill parcels as well as the rampant inflation in land costs since the purchase.

It is uncertain what will become of the property, though County Attorney Bill Clague did say Thursday that Hopes had indicated that there had been some interest expressed, explaining to commissioners that such a resolution is required before any negotiations take place and that any deal reached would have to come back before the board for approval.

Given the fact that multiple developers were said to have made overtures to the previous owners prior to the county's purchase (thought to be the most likely reason they were willing to spend money making it a campaign issue), housing development would seem to be the most likely outcome.